On 4/9/06, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:
maru dubshinki wrote:
On 4/9/06, Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/9/06, Carl Fûrstenberg azatoth@gmail.com wrote:
link?
It should be in the dead-tree US edition.
The Graph in the original article seems to be corrected as of today:
http://www.economist.com/images/20060318/CSF428.gif
It still states:
"And after the furore over the biographical entry last year, Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries, and new contributors must wait a few days before they can start new ones."
http://www.economist.com/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=5624944
That's not the only problem. They are also using a very misleading article count- we don't have three million. We only have 3M if one counts every last entry and redirect as an article.
You seem to be laboring under the delusion that nothing exists outside the English Wikipedia. That kind of attitude gets us a very bad reputation in the Wikipedia community's other languages. If you read the article, you will find that the article count there (2.6 million) is explicitly described as covering 120 languages.
--Michael Snow
It's still wrong then; to my withered and weary eyes, if you follow the article line to the top where it ends, it is vastly closer to 3M than 2.6M.
~maru